From: tkoenig@netcologne.de   
      
   MitchAlsup  schrieb:   
   >   
   > Thomas Koenig  posted:   
   >   
   >> MitchAlsup  schrieb:   
   >>   
   >> > The only thing in this corner of my ISA I regret is not having more bits   
   >> > for the scale {to cover complex double, and Quaternions}   
   >>   
   >> There is a bit of inconvenience, but strenght reduction can go a   
   >> long way to bridge that gap.  Consider something like   
   >>   
   >> void foo (__complex double *c, double *d, long int n)   
   >> {   
   >>   for (long int i=0; i>     c[i] += d[i];   
   >> }   
   >   
   > Wondering why "c[i] += d[i];" did not get a type mismatch.   
   >   
   > Should be "c[i].real += d[i];"   
      
   C's implicit conversion rules.   
   --   
   This USENET posting was made without artificial intelligence,   
   artificial impertinence, artificial arrogance, artificial stupidity,   
   artificial flavorings or artificial colorants.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)